SAFETYLIT WEEKLY UPDATE

We compile citations and summaries of about 400 new articles every week.
RSS Feed

HELP: Tutorials | FAQ
CONTACT US: Contact info

Search Results

Journal Article

Citation

Bakken A, Targett S, Bere T, Eirale C, Farooq A, Tol JL, Whiteley R, Khan KM, Bahr R. Br. J. Sports Med. 2018; 52(16): 1047-1053.

Affiliation

Department of Sports Medicine, Oslo Sports Trauma Research Center, Norwegian School of Sport Sciences, Oslo, Norway.

Copyright

(Copyright © 2018, BMJ Publishing Group)

DOI

10.1136/bjsports-2016-097307

PMID

28512188

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The 9+ screening battery test consists of 11 tests to assess limitations in functional movement.

AIM: To examine the association of the 9+ with lower extremity injuries and to identify a cut-off point to predict injury risk.

METHODS: Professional male football (soccer) players in Qatar from 14 teams completed the 9+ at the beginning of the 2013/2014 and 2014/2015 seasons. Time-loss injuries and exposure in training and matches were registered prospectively by club medical staff during these seasons. Univariate and multivariate Cox regression analyses were used to calculate HR and 95% CI. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves were calculated to determine sensitivity and specificity and identify the optimal cut-off point for risk assessment.

RESULTS: 362 players completed the 9+ and had injury and exposure registration. There were 526 injuries among 203 players (56.1%) during the two seasons; injuries to the thigh were the most frequent. There was no association between 9+ total score and the risk of lower extremity injuries (HR 1.02, 95% CI 0.99 to 1.05, p=0.13), even after adjusting for other risk factors in a multivariate analysis (HR 1.01, 95% CI 0.98 to 1.04, p=0.37). ROC curve analysis revealed an area under the curve of 0.48, and there was no cut-off point that distinguished injured from non-injured players.

CONCLUSION: The 9+ was not associated with lower extremity injury, and it was no better than chance for distinguishing between injured and uninjured players. Therefore, the 9+ test cannot be recommended as an injury prediction tool in this population.

© Article author(s) (or their employer(s) unless otherwise stated in the text of the article) 2017. All rights reserved. No commercial use is permitted unless otherwise expressly granted.


Language: en

Keywords

athletes; football; functional movement test; injury prevention; screening

NEW SEARCH


All SafetyLit records are available for automatic download to Zotero & Mendeley
Print